One of the great unspoken biases in psychopharmacology is the belief system about the medication. What is the medication supposed to do after all? Is it supposed to be life-changing in terms of positive improvements? Is it supposed to eradicate all types of depression and anxiety? Is it supposed to create the perfect cognitive and emotional state? Is it supposed to turn an average student into an MIT professor? Is it just supposed to treat a symptom and if so - how many symptoms? Does it need to address some underlying physiological disturbance or can anyone take it and get the same benefits? These are all unspoken biases about psychiatric medications that need to be explored with people who are taking the medications. I don't think that a psychiatrist should even take for granted that a patient knows the difference between depression or anxiety or why thinking that Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) with essentially no impairment in professional, academic, or social life is not the same as having that diagnosis.
One of the best examples is the myth of the perfect mind. If ADHD is finally diagnosed and treated, that means the person's mental functioning will either be normalized or be much better than it was in the past. It should be possible to read entire book chapters and even books for the first time. That is true isn't it? It turns out that the effects of most medications for ADHD are modest and rarely life changing. I have talked with many people who had clear diagnoses of ADHD as children who did not like the side effects of the medication and stopped taking it or even faked taking it in school. They developed strategies for coping in the world and were able to achieve academic and vocational success. Even some of the strongest proponents of medical treatment of ADHD will agree that proper care also involves lifestyle and management strategies and in some cases formal therapies in addition to medication. That does not mean that some people will not do better with medications and worse with lifestyle modification, but it does mean that there is much more latitude in the treatment of this disorder than is commonly assumed. It is fair to say that in many clinics these days, there are clinicians actively looking fro any treatable psychiatric disorder. The theory seems to be: "If I treat the social anxiety disorder, bipolar disorder, ADHD, panic attacks, and insomnia this person will be a lot better off." There is really no evidence that this is true or that there is even a good way to select what disorders should be treated first.
The patient side of this problem seems to be the myth of the perfect mind extended to many conditions. It is evident in a number of ways. Some people present with some very basic knowledge of psychopharmacology. They may suggest that their "serotonin" or "dopamine" is out of whack and that they heard that there are specific medications to correct that. In some cases they will suggest a medication. In other cases, a person will not be very stress tolerant and suggest that they need something that will either reduce day to day stress or significant stress from predictable major life stressors like the disruption of a job or relationship. They seem to think that there is a medication that will both reduce the emotional reaction to this pain but also remove the cognitive elements from their mental life. Depending on the person's baseline cognitive state, they can become quite demanding if they think that they are not getting adequate relief or it is not happening fast enough. The risk in these situations is starting to take a number of medications with substantial side effects that frequently precludes them getting back to their baseline conscious state. There is often a focus on a person's baseline in psychiatry or medicine, but that baseline is almost never adequately characterized. That is true in the case of blood pressure but more true in the case of mental illnesses. In the case of severe mental illnesses like bipolar disorder baseline is almost always defined in terms of the presence or absence of a few symptoms. Wide areas of a person's life like their baseline intellectual functioning, social behavior, and typical stream of consciousness are rarely considered - even in research studies.
Addiction makes everything worse and therefore it also provides the best illustration. The graphs at the top of the page show two drug response curves with the blue lines showing a good response. A person who is using an addictive drug and the high risk response to that drug is conditioned to expect the drug response curve on the right - a continued therapeutic response for increasing doses of the medication. In that case there is no element of safety or toxicity. True drug responses are represented by the curve on the left - an interval of response followed by toxicity and limited response at the higher levels. Addictions have a second effect by creating a bias that mental states can be fine tuned within the space of hours by drugs. Any feeling state can be immediately modified by the addition of benzodiazepines, stimulants, opioids or alcohol. This is often erroneously referred to as "self-medication" and it is a strong conditioned response that generalizes to the treatment of disorders with non-addicting drugs.
The psychological effects of these patterns are significant. They can lead to continued addiction and disrupted care. A person may have the belief: "If this doctor can't give me something that will get rid of the negative way I feel right now - I will take something to get rid of it." It may lead to disruption of the therapeutic alliance, through anger and open criticism about the lack of immediate effects or minimization of physician concern about side effects and a general lack of concern about toxicity on the part of the patient. There is often an associated belief: "I have a very high tolerance for drugs and you can give me higher starting doses and higher maintenance doses of drugs than you give most people." Many people in this situation experience very high levels of anxiety if they are not getting high doses or the physician does not seem to be increasing the medication fast enough.
The thoughts and feelings about medications is one of the most difficult areas in psychiatry. Contrary to what is written by critics - nobody is complaining about being overmedicated. Most of the complaints I hear about are about not getting enough medication and not getting to those high doses fast enough. The solution is rarely to provide the medication and amount requested. The solution is to spend enough time talking with the patient about these issues. I generally start with the limitations of the defined treatment and a medication strategy that is risk avoidant. In that initial conversation I usually tell the person whether or not they have a diagnosis or if I agree with a pre-existing diagnosis. If I detect signs that unrealistic expectations about the medication are present I move into that area, point out that the medication will not lead to a perfect mind, and what they have to do in addition to taking medication. If I find that they are really focused on medication issues to the point that they are experiencing anxiety from it - I usually encourage them to think about something else and provide some examples of what else can be done.
There is some literature on psychodynamic issues and medication in the transference that I have not found very useful. I suppose you could say that from what I have written the medication has meaning far beyond its pharmacology. There is an interpersonal and intrapsychic context. I think it is addressable in what is usually considered straightforward supportive psychotherapy, but it definitely needs to be addressed. It is a frequent cause of medication or treatment "failures".
George Dawson, MD, DFAPA
